Surplusage hurts not.

Explanation

Unnecessary or redundant matter in a pleading or instrument does not vitiate what is otherwise sufficient — superfluous words are disregarded rather than treated as fatal defects.

Where this applies

• A deed describes a property as 'the north forty acres, more or less, of the Johnson farm, being approximately forty acres' — the redundant language does not invalidate the deed; the extra words are simply disregarded.
• A contract contains three separate clauses that all say the same thing about the payment deadline — the redundancy does not void the contract or create ambiguity; surplusage is harmless.
• A will states that the testator leaves 'all of my worldly possessions, goods, chattels, and personal property' to his daughter — the overlapping terms do not create confusion or defeat the bequest; unnecessary words are ignored.